Tether abandoned plans to freeze its dollar-pegged USDT tokens on several older blockchains and is choosing instead to classify them as “unsupported,” according to an Aug. 29 statement.

The change applies to networks such as Bitcoin Cash, Kusama, EOS, and Algorand, among others. Users will still be able to move tokens across wallets, but Tether will no longer issue or redeem USDT on those platforms.

The shift came after weeks of community pushback over the company’s original plan, which would have locked tokens in place and left them non-transferable.

‘Unsupported’ classification

In June, Tether had outlined a transition that would begin Sept. 1, 2025, with all USDT on the affected blockchains frozen and excluded from redemptions.

The move was framed as a way to streamline operations by cutting off support for networks that accounted for a negligible share of the stablecoin’s activity. Under that plan, tokens would have remained visible on-chain but effectively stranded without any movement or redemption path.

Following sustained criticism from developers and users on smaller ecosystems like EOS and Algorand, Tether retreated from a hard freeze. The firm said the revised approach “aligns with its broader strategy” while avoiding reputational damage.

The compromise allows Tether to wind down low-volume chains without provoking backlash from users who would have been locked out of their assets.

Pivot toward Bitcoin

The announcement came just one day after Tether disclosed plans to issue a native USDT on Bitcoin using the RGB protocol.

Unlike wrapped tokens that rely on custodial bridges, RGB integrates directly with Bitcoin’s scripting and client-side validation, making USDT part of the Bitcoin ecosystem’s security model.

USDT remains most heavily concentrated on Ethereum and Tron, each with more than $80 billion in circulation, alongside smaller footprints on Solana and a few other networks.

The decision to drop support for legacy chains signals tightening resources on platforms with higher adoption while staking new ground on Bitcoin.

Mentioned in this article

Chinese creditors affected by FTX’s latest legal maneuver are ramping up efforts to challenge the bankrupt exchange’s request to delay payouts to users in 49 jurisdictions with restrictive or uncertain crypto laws.

The group is turning to US courts and regulators, raising concerns about fairness, transparency, and procedural integrity.

Speaking with CryptoSlate, a Chinese creditor named Will has retained a US attorney and is part of a growing community of over 500 Chinese creditors organizing their response against FTX’s decision.

He revealed that dozens of affected users have already sent formal objections to the bankruptcy court. “So far, 35 people from our group have mailed letters to the judge,” he said on X.

He told CryptoSlate:

“I’m working closely with a growing group of Chinese creditors—now over 500 members—many of whom are taking coordinated actions such as writing letters to the judge and US Trustee, and exploring group legal representation.”

According to him, their frustration centers around a recent FTX motion asking the court for permission to hold back $470 million in distributions to creditors in countries with ambiguous crypto rules. China accounts for the majority of this amount, with $380 million in claims, or roughly 82% of the restricted total.

Will, however, stressed that:

“$470 million is not just a cold number — behind it are countless families already hurt once. A second wound is unfolding. We can’t stay silent.”

Concerns over fairness

Speaking on behalf of the Chinese creditors, Will argues that FTX’s move contradicts earlier assurances.

He told CryptoSlate:

“We were told clearly: as long as we submitted our claims and voted in favor of the plan, we would be entitled to receive our distributions like everyone else. Based on that understanding, we cooperated, our claims were verified, and we supported the reorganization plan in good faith.”

He argues that this reversal erodes trust in the process. FTX’s new legal move could deny them their rightful compensation because of their “nationality or perceived legal uncertainty.”

He said:

“This situation is not only unfair—it’s procedurally questionable. A confirmed plan should not be altered in a way that selectively strips rights from certain creditors after the fact. We believe such changes, especially those targeting a group of people based solely on jurisdiction, deserve close scrutiny from the court.”

FTX claims it is trying to avoid legal risk by not sending funds to countries where crypto use may be restricted.

However, critics see this as a dangerous precedent that could selectively undermine the rights of verified claimants after a reorganization plan has already been confirmed.

He concluded:

“At the end of the day, this is not just about money—it’s about fairness, credibility, and trust in the system. We are not asking for special treatment; we are asking to be treated equally under the same rules as everyone else. A confirmed distribution process should not be altered at the last stage to selectively exclude those who have already done everything required of them.”

Mentioned in this article

“Ok, why is literally everybody and their mom talking about Sui right now?”

If that’s you – hey, you know we got you. Let’s put an end to the pain of being unaware:

Yesterday, the Sui blockchain experienced the biggest DeFi hack of 2025.

A hacker stole $223M from Cetus, the largest DEX aggregator on Sui.

FYI: that’s about 94% of what the platform had in total value locked (TVL) the day before. So yeah, pretty big deal.

“But… how?”, said you, maybe.

Like I said – don’t worry, we got you.

The attacker exploited a flaw in Cetus’ smart contracts – and according to HackenProof CTO Alex Horlan, this is how the whole thing went down:

Step 1. Making a garbage token look valuable

The attacker made their own token – just a worthless coin called BULLA.

Now, on most DEXs, prices are set by how many coins are sitting in a pool. If there’s a lot of BULLA and only a little SUI (a legit token), the system assumes BULLA must be really valuable – because it thinks it takes a lot of BULLA to buy just a little SUI.

So the hacker dumped tons of BULLA into the pool and added just a bit of SUI. Now the pool’s price math was tricked: it thought 1 BULLA was worth a lot of SUI, when really, it was garbage.

Step 2. Setting up a fake liquidity pool

Next, the hacker used BULLA to create a new liquidity pool – this time adding almost nothing to it, just enough to set it up.

When someone starts a new liquidity pool, they get LP tokens in return. These LP tokens are like a receipt showing what percent of the pool you own, and later you can trade them in to get your share of the real tokens in the pool.

But the system still thinks the fake token is super expensive, so when the attacker adds a tiny bit of it into the pool, it treats that like a massive deposit. As a result, the hacker gets a huge number of LP tokens – way more than they actually deserve.

Step 3. Cash out

Now armed with those LP tokens, the hacker starts removing liquidity – exchanging their LP tokens for real tokens from the pool.

Because the system’s math is broken from the earlier trick, it lets them keep pulling out real money – again and again – even though they barely put anything real in to begin with.

I know. Crazy stuff.

And the result was a mess:

Craaaazy stuff.

Cetus scrambled to respond:

• Paused all smart contracts to prevent more damage;

• Teamed up with the Sui Foundation and froze around $162M of the hacker’s funds. Sadly, the hacker had already bridged about $60M over to Ethereum;

• Offered a white hat bounty – up to $6M – if the attacker returns the Ether.

Which sounds like a pretty solid response.

But many people went like, “Uhhh… pause. Sui can freeze funds?”

Yeah, if someone can just halt transactions, it feels a lot like the traditional banking system. And for a network that calls itself decentralized, that’s a big red flag.

On the other hand, people like crypto sleuth Matteo pointed out that what happened wasn’t centralized control – it was decentralization in action.

According to him, Sui validators from all over the world independently coordinated to stop a known malicious wallet. No one gave orders, no one had to ask permission. They just chose to act.

That, he said, is what true decentralization looks like – not being powerless, but being able to respond together as a network.

And it probably was the right choice. If you can stop someone from stealing, why wouldn’t you?

But even if this made sense, it left a crack in the idea that Sui was fully decentralized.

So yeah. And that, friends, is why everyone is freaking out about Sui. The pain of unawareness has been released.

OKX CEO Star Xu has responded to accusations from Tron founder Justin Sun, who claimed the exchange failed to act on a law enforcement request to freeze stolen funds linked to a hack of Tron’s official X account.

Sun alleged that OKX ignored a “freeze notice” from law enforcement following the May 3 breach, during which Tron’s X account was compromised.

The attacker reportedly posted a malicious smart contract address, sent direct messages, and engaged with unfamiliar accounts.

Justin Sun Says OKX Ignored Freeze Request

In a now-deleted post, Sun stated that the exchange had been contacted via official email but had not responded, leaving him with “no other way” to reach OKX’s compliance team.

“These stolen funds do not belong to me; I’m acting to protect the community,” Sun claimed.

Star Xu dismissed the allegations. “OKX has a consumer protection policy governed by law,” Xu wrote on X.

“We can’t freeze a customer’s funds based on your personal X post or oral communication. As the CEO of HTX, I think you should understand this.”

Xu added that OKX’s law enforcement (LE) cooperation team reviewed its email accounts, including spam folders, and found no official request related to the case.

“Our LE cooperation team just checked the email, including the spam box; we haven’t received any request related with this case,” he said.

Xu also posted a screenshot of Sun’s original deleted message and challenged him to share evidence of the alleged freeze notice, including the time and source of the request.

The incident adds to a growing list of social media hacks in the crypto space.

On March 15, Yu Hu, founder of crypto AI platform Kaito, had his account hijacked to spread false warnings about compromised wallets—shortly after attackers opened a short position in KAITO tokens.

Similarly, on Feb. 26, the Pump.fun X account was compromised to promote a fake governance token.

In another instance, UK MP Lucy Powell’s X account was hacked on April 15 to promote a scam token.

Crypto Hacks Surge in 2025 as Losses Top $1.74 Billion in Four Months

Hackers stole over $92.4 million from crypto projects in April 2025 alone, according to blockchain security firm Immunefi.

The figure represents a 27.3% year-over-year increase and more than double the losses reported in March.

April’s attacks occurred across 15 incidents, with two major exploits accounting for the bulk of the damage.

UPCX, an open-source platform, lost $70 million in a single attack, while decentralized exchange KiloEx was hit for $7.5 million.

Other affected projects included Loopscale, ZKsync, Term Labs, and Bitcoin Mission, each experiencing losses exceeding $1 million.

Cumulatively, the first four months of 2025 have already seen $1.74 billion in crypto losses—more than all of 2024, which totaled $1.49 billion.

Immunefi previously noted that Q1 2025 was the worst quarter for hacks in crypto history, driven largely by massive breaches of centralized exchanges Phemex and Bybit.

The post OKX CEO Defends Exchange Amid Justin Sun Freeze Dispute appeared first on Cryptonews.

It all began six months ago. Bitcoin core version 22.0 began to stick to certain dates in the next attempt at syncing. It destroyed the entire blockchain. I downloaded version 27.1 and started syncing with my wallet from August 2024, but the issue was resolved. However, the situation was repeated on February 2, 2025. When I tried to download the last bitcoin core block, it was frozen on December 31, 2024. Repeated attempts to restart were made. I started “Reindex”, which hung after a while. Then I decided to repeat the successful attempt: I destroyed everything. Version 27.1 was released and the wallet was uploaded from August 2024. However, this time the program was suspended in January 2019. Currently, I’m downloading blockchain without loading my wallet. Is there any hope in that? So I’d like to wait for a full sync and then download the wallet. What is the reason? The computer with the wallet has a two-core processor, 8GB of RAM and a 2 terabyte hard disk.